As George W. Bush, president of the world's only superpower, sat before the White House fireplace with Wen Jiabao, premier of the world's only potential emerging superpower, their words were friendly - and at the same time cautious, reflecting unresolved differences in values purportedly upheld by each. Mr Bush praised China's creation of 'national wealth' but then went on to repeatedly use America's favourite slogan, 'freedom', talking about China's need to have more 'economic freedom' and 'social freedoms'. Mr Bush's perception of freedom in China might change radically if he had the opportunity to join Chinese businessmen for an evening on the town in Beijing or Shanghai. Certainly, on such an occasion he would not be free to go to bed before his usual 10pm retirement. Anticipating Mr Bush's agenda, Mr Wen addressed the democracy issue head-on, noting that America's democracy began in 1776 and underwent violent and crisis-ridden development during the American civil war, and the universal suffrage and equal rights movements in the 19th and 20th centuries. His point was that America's development of a wholesome formula for democracy spanned two centuries. China, in turn, will also have to undergo its own logical process of development. He reminded Mr Bush of the differences between the two countries, saying: 'No matter how small the problem is, when multiplied by 1.3 billion, it becomes a very big problem. No matter how refined [a nation's] financial position and materialism, if you divide it by 1.3 billion it becomes quite low per capita.' This is the problem that 'Chinese leaders must always bear in mind', he said. The 16th Chinese Communist Party Congress report stated a basic principle: 'The future 20 years for China are an important time of strategic opportunity.' China's new leadership is clearly aware that opportunity must be grasped and situations turned around to China's advantage, and shows this through pragmatic and proactive diplomacy. Envisioning potential flash points in China-US relations during a presidential election year, Mr Wen took the initiative in visiting Mr Bush, confronting issues in an attempt to turn them into opportunities. Mr Bush was prepared to pressure Mr Wen on trade issues, pushing for a revaluation of China's currency. Mr Wen countered, presenting a pragmatic solution. 'We hope America admits the position of China's domestic market economy and abolishes restrictions on our purchase of high technology,' he said. 'On this point I sincerely hope the relevant departments of the American government throw all these past ideas and behaviour, which do not fit the current situation, into the Pacific Ocean. Be bolder and keep up with the times.' When speaking with UN Secretary-General Kofi Anan concerning how the UN's role should evolve in the changing international environment, Mr Wen encouraged reform of the institution. 'Time is on the move, the world is changing. Reform must fit the changing environment.' On this topic, Mr Wen told an uneasy Mr Bush that, 'Conflicts within humanity arise because of materialism. Sometimes such conflicts become more horrible because they are driven by [conflicts over] profit.' Mr Wen explained his logic. 'China's 5,000 years of history has given us a philosophical approach to situations. While there are differences, peace is precious.' He reasoned the world today has many differences, requiring many approaches to resolve those differences. Mr Wen's preference for harmony - avoiding conflicts wherever possible in resolving international crises - clearly differs from Mr Bush's. Mr Wen's visit served to bridge gaps between two nations whose co-operation is today more essential then ever. The premier's trip to Washington was the first time a Chinese administration figure has appeared before the international media as open to change, flexible and pragmatic - in contrast with the Bush administration, which increasingly appears rigid and locked into sets of fixed ideals. Images stick. When China-US relations normalised in 1979, the media sharply portrayed one nation as a rigid military state driven by ideology, and the other embracing values of free market, free trade and humanism. Will the two nations change symbolic roles and images over the coming years, driven by international events and changes in their respective domestic values? The sharp symbolic differences portrayed in the past are already blurred. Laurence Brahm is a political economist and lawyer based in Beijing
